MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4375851974 · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(23)00355-0

Evidence-based antenatal interventions to reduce the incidence of small vulnerable newborns and their associated poor outcomes

2023· review· en· W4375851974 on OpenAlexaff
G Justus Hofmeyr, Robert E. Black, Ewelina Rogozińska, Austin Heuer, Neff Walker, Per Ashorn, Ulla Ashorn, Nita Bhandari, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Annariina Koivu, Somesh Kumar, Joy E Lawn, Stephen Munjanja, Pieta Näsänen‐Gilmore, Doreen Ramogola‐Masire, Marleen Temmerman, Nigel Klein, Sufia Askari

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health ResearchSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersChildren's Investment Fund Foundation
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)Psychological interventionPediatricsObstetricsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.387
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.105 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations94
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe LancetSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207